Reaction to Gorbachev Views

I was rather amazed at the contrast in the responses by former Sen. George McGovern (D-S.D.) and former Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick (Editorial Pages, Sept. 15) to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev’s recent interview with the Time magazine.

Kirkpatrick fails to see the threat of large-scale war. She thinks that Gorbachev in that interview exaggerates when he says, “Relations between our two countries are continuing to deteriorate, the arms race is intensifying and the threat of war is not subsiding.” Kirkpatrick seems to have failed to learn any lesson from history that a minor incident in a remote place thousands of miles away, could steer Soviet Union and United State on the confrontational course. Wasn’t it a small incident that set off World War I, which ultimately engulfed all major powers of the world?

Kirkpatrick does not seem to have grasped the simple facts that better relations and reduction of the arms race are of vital importance for world peace and economic progress. Throughout her article, she demonstrated an inherent mistrust of Gorbachev and the Soviet Union that he now leads. When the man is talking so seriously, why not to give him a chance?

On the other hand, McGovern’s assessment of that interview is so accurate and meaningful. By rightly explaining the gist of the interview and by highlighting the main points, he so pragmatically takes Gorbachev on his word. Perhaps relations between the two superpowers would have been a on solid foundation by now if President Reagan approached the arms control problem with the upmost urgency, pragmatism and realism that it demands. It is still not too late.

CHAITAWYA DAVE

Los Angeles